Student Claims Colleges Teach Male-Discrimination

Share Article

Missouri’s second largest college has been charged with teaching discrimination against men. A student says his class studied data that denigrated men, elevated women, and stereotyped the sexes in ways that were male-discriminatory. He says similar data is taught in other courses at the College, and throughout higher education as well. The College never responded to the student. The U.S. Department’s of Education and Justice have not replied to his appeals for eight and four months respectively, so the case has been appealed to Cabinet-level authority.

A student at St. Louis Community College, Doug Baker, claims, “My class was assigned to read and then discuss 96-pages of material like the following. What readers need to know beforehand is that objective scientific research overwhelming indicates women perpetrate physical violence and sexual assaults at least as often and severely as men."

(Note: Quotes from college text)'…physical abuse…is not limited to husband-and-wife…single, separated, and divorced women are…at greater risk of battering…women form the major target group of severe domestic violence…domestic violence injures more women than automobile accidents, muggings, and rapes…every 15 seconds…a woman is beaten…about 4 million women are abused every year…(our) cultural norms tolerate…and condone family violence…(due to academic activists) a history of abuse and threat is (now) is valid…legal defense for battered women who kill their husbands. Clearly a great deal of violence by women is retaliatory or in self-defense…(sustaining) battering of women is the belief in male supremacy…the result of a long-term sexist paternalistic social order that rewards oppressive behavior in men, but expects women to be submissive…the woman’s position is to obey, conciliate, perform traditional domestic duties…be subservient…conjugal terrorism is used to break the victims resistance and bend her to the will of the terrorist/batterer…brainwashing…isolation, torture, sleep deprivation, malnourishment...bondage…belittling…are all standard procedures… 683,000 women were raped in 1990 and 12.1 million women…raped at least once in their in four women will be raped in their lifetime…250,000 U.S. children, most of them girls, are sexually molested…each year…the majority of (sexual) assaults are perpetrated on children and females—etc., etc., etc. (Italics added.)'(End of quotes)

In March, 2005 Baker filed two complaints with the College, asking them to stop teaching such information. His letter states, “I am deeply troubled and concerned by what I found in that textbook... I found (it) demeaning…intolerable (and it) has distracted and upset me enough that I am no longer able to remain focused and adequately motivated. Since it is too late to…audit” he asked to withdraw. He says, “I handed the memo to the College’s counselor after she said my only choice was to withdraw or continue (and thus fail) my classes. I had not had a chance to say anything in class.”

When the College failed to respond, he filed discrimination charges with the U.S. Dept of Education, Office of Civil Rights in May, 2005 (Docket: #07052042). He says, “The DOE denied my claim in July. I did all the initiating. They didn’t even asked any questions. They were only focused on educator’s First Amendment rights. They showed no interest in safe-guarding student’s civil rights, or protecting student’s ‘freedom-to-speak-and-think.’ I see their investigation as a sham.”

The DOE/OCR denial letter states: “…the facts you alleged, even if…true, are insufficient to establish…discrimination…you did not allege (being) denied a…benefit by the College…On the Contrary, the college provide you an equal opportunity to express your opinion…(and) withdraw from the course…you did not allege that you…were subjected to acts… that were so severe…that you were denied the ability to participate in and benefit from an educational program... Such material, though…you believe (it to be) false, constitutes free speech...protected by the First Amendment.”

Baker has asked the DOE: “Doesn’t my first letter to the College describe ‘severe’ personal affects and lost ‘educational opportunities’ and ‘benefits’? If placing want ads under ‘Male’ and ‘Female’ headings in newspapers discriminates against women, how can teaching male-prejudiced and female-biased data like this to junior college students fail to violate men’s civil rights? If it is illegal to compel women to quit their jobs to overcome or avoid discrimination in the workplace, how can forcing male students to drop classes to achieve the same ends in education be justified? Throughout history, has any group of bigots failed to argue that other laws allow them to continue their discriminatory practices?”

“Doesn’t the DOE ruling mean that educator’s ‘free speech’ empowers them to teach their personal social ideals and politics? Violate male student’s civil rights? Who’s next? Could they select data from education, employment, and the courts that teaches students Blacks or Hispanics are less intelligent, achievement-oriented, and accountable, or more vicious and criminally-inclined than whites? Could they choose workplace data that leads students to believe women have less technical and managerial ability, or that men are more logical, goal-seeking, and teamwork-oriented? What exactly can’t educators do?”

“I am convinced assertions like these not only violate men’s civil rights, but would be discriminatory even if they were true,” Baker says. “It is not that I ‘believe’ this data is false. It is in fact false! The College’s textbook even reports the sexes abuse and rape one another equally, but in ways that lead students and educated non-specialists away from these truths. Massive gender-balanced research consistently finds no significant differences (i.e. > 4%) between the sexes in any fundamental human attribute. Such studies only find ‘surface’ differences, which offset one another in the sexes. Objective cultural studies refute all the conjecture about our society as well. Finally, this data has certainly done serious harm to most men and boys, helped erode gender and family relations, and therefore hurt women too.”

“Based on factors like these,” Baker says, “I felt the DOE was guilty of the same sex-stereotypical thinking as the College.” When they failed to respond to his appeal and follow-ups, he filed discrimination charges against the DOE and College with the U.S. Dept. of Justice last August (Case: #237618). After five months, the DOJ finally sent Baker a letter refusing to get involved with an entirely different case filed by a totally different person. When the DOJ did not reply to his appeals for four months, he appealed to the Attorney General and Secretary of Education in early April and awaits their answers.

Baker does not understand the College, DOE, and DOJ’s failure to reply to his appeals. He asked if he would be treated similarly if he were a woman or racial minority. In any case, he says “I need the support of objective and brave professionals in the media, research, government, and, most of all, the public. I am also seeking legal counsel for civil actions against the school, publishers, and so forth. But this case is incredibly socially controversial, politically explosive, and there are no direct precedents for it. Thus it would certainly be a most unpleasant, long-and-drawn-out, and costly case to prosecute.”

His website contains a no-holds-barred discussion of male-discrimination, and an in-depth analysis of related issues, facts, and events. The case’s relevant correspondence is also presented, offering a resource for reporting, research, and class/group discussion.

# # #

Share article on social media or email:

View article via:

Pdf Print

Contact Author

Doug Baker